In a groundbreaking ruling on Monday, District Court Judge Kathy Seeley sided with young environmental activists in Montana, declaring that the state's failure to consider climate change when evaluating new projects was causing harm and violating their constitutional rights to a clean and healthy environment. The case, brought by a group of young Montana residents ranging in age from 5 to 22, is the first of its kind to go to trial in the United States.

Judge Seeley's ruling marks a significant step in a global movement of legal decisions that establish a government's duty to protect citizens from climate change. She found that the policy used by the state to evaluate requests for fossil fuel permits, which prevents the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions' harmful effects, is unconstitutional. Seeley highlighted the substantial impact of Montana's emissions and climate change on the state's environment and the harm and injury caused.

The trial featured testimony from climate scientists who detailed the already evident health and environmental damage caused by increasing greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activity. The young plaintiffs also testified about the first-hand effects they had witnessed, such as extreme weather events, warming rivers and streams, worsening asthma due to wildfire smoke, and disruptions to nature interfering with Indigenous traditions.

The case challenged a law backed by Republican lawmakers that prohibited state regulators from considering the climate effects of new mining projects. Montana, with its long history of mining, holds deep environmental traditions, as reflected in its constitution's amendment in 1972 to maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment for present and future generations.

Environmental advocates hope that the favorable ruling in Montana will exert pressure not only on state leaders but also on other courts where similar litigation is pending. Our Children's Trust, the organization guiding the Montana case, already won a preliminary victory in June when a judge ruled that a case against the federal government in Oregon could proceed to trial.

Despite the significant victory, the ruling's implementation may face obstacles. The Montana legislature is now tasked with finding a way to bring the policy into compliance, but progress is expected to be slow in a Republican-led state heavily reliant on the fossil fuel industry. The state's Attorney General, Austin Knudsen, plans to appeal the ruling and criticized Judge Seeley's decision as "absurd," accusing her of allowing a "taxpayer-funded publicity stunt" and aligning herself with the plaintiffs' agenda.

However, the plaintiffs' attorneys presented evidence that increasing carbon dioxide emissions are driving climate change, leading to more droughts, wildfires, and decreased snowpack. These changes directly impact the physical and mental health of the young people involved in the case. The state's argument that Montana's contribution to global CO2 emissions is minimal does not negate the need for action, as a remedy must offer relief, regardless of its global scale impact, according to the plaintiffs.

Overall, the ruling represents a significant victory for the youth activists in Montana and sets a precedent for future cases seeking to hold governments accountable for their role in climate change.